Why You Gotta be so Mean?

Some of the famous song lyrics by Taylor Swift in her song “Mean” really help us step back and ask the hard questions of those around us. Why do you have to be so mean? Especially to someone who works so hard at her career, acts appropriately, gives back to her community, and is a role model for young people everywhere. The misconduct is coming from all of the cheeky people who got Taylor Swift’s song “Shake It Off” disqualified from the Hottest 100.

As an American, I had never heard of the Triple J Hottest 100 until I spent my first full summer in Australia in the beginning of 2014. That and, when I did learn of it, it genuinely seemed like a real way for people to vote for their favourite song and have a happy Australia Day. It’s not fair that social media sites like BuzzFeed then get to insert themselves into people's lives uninvited thinking they can “troll the poll.” It’s not like Taylor Swift was paying them to get her song on the list - she’d be there anyways. Not only has the international pop culture community watched her personal brand grow from quiet and shy country musician into strong and dedicated young woman, but it has also watched her lyrics and stories shine through people’s poor behaviours. Taylor is the face of resilience, and she will overcome this obstacle as well.

(Source: KFC Facebook Page)

So I bet you want to more about what really happened? Well, it seems like with the image above, KFC decided to publicise their vote for the Hottest 100. This raises advertising and ethical questions, similar to topics we worked through in our Ethics and Regulatory Environment unit. What right does KFC own to this image? Does Taylor Swift’s Public Relations representatives even know her face and reputation is being used in this fashion? Does Taylor even approve of the message being used as her words? These are all common marketing problems facing not only Taylor’s personal brand, but also her business affiliations and reputation. Funnily enough, I would actually compare this advertising practice to political campaigning in the USA. Kind of putting words in people’s mouths and claiming that one or another certain person approves of the message. Additionally, while it may be a good idea to sometimes use celebrities as brand ambassadors, I wonder if Taylor Swift would ever even consider eating KFC food? I think this brand overstepped their advertising boundaries here.

Next, Triple J claimed that Taylor Swift’s song “Shake It Off” would have only made 12th place on the list, but chances are people didn’t vote for it who would have when they found out it was disqualified the day before Australia Day. Additionally, rumour has it that at least one of the songs in the top 10 of the Hottest 100 had never even been played on the station’s airwaves. Isn’t that saying something? People may like a certain song, and have voted for it, yet that song didn’t get requested, nor played by the company the whole past year? Credit should be given where it’s due, especially if Taylor didn’t promote, or probably even know, about what was going on and how people were using her name and image.

Copyrighting and Trademarking are so important in the marketing world, and although no official lawsuits have happened in this instance, they could have. It is important as marketers that we know the limitation of our brands and advertising power. Someone is probably getting fired over at KFC right now, when they could have done a little bit of research to find out about how their customers would have liked to see them display their support for the big day.

(Source: BuzzFeed)

So note for BuzzFeed…. hire some real and ethical marketers to make sure you’re not ruining people’s brands, reputations or businesses. Even Triple J looks bad because you thought you had the authority to tell them and their listeners what they wanted to hear or vote for. The sun may not have been shining this Australia Day, but I was still rocking out to Tay Tay and I’m sure she’s going to shake you off because the haters gunna hate, hate, hate, hate.

Christine Drpich
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

#CLEANEATING, but hold the McNuggets: McDonald’s answer to Australia’s Hipster Dining Movement

"We provide food that customers love, day after day after day. People just want more of it."

Ray Kroc, Founder, McDonalds

I'm sorry Mr Kroc, but it seems in today's day and age, the glisten of the Golden Arches have begun to fade, with the Australian public beginning to call bluff on this once made statement.

Despite feeding 1.7 million Aussies a day within its 930 restaurants speckled across the country, the global cheeseburger giant has developed what seems to be image problems of its own, with year-on-year domestic sales decreasing. 

Over the past decade, the brand has aimed to reposition itself from associations with greasy-processed burgers  and characters such as "The Cheeseburglar" and "Mayor McCheese"; to being a more nutritional, fresh and socially-aware "restaurant".

However despite this attempt, McDonalds, like many other fast-food franchises in Australia, is now beginning to tackle a different type of epidemic. One that is not only a hot-topic for a number of global-brands, but is also vital in ensuring the overall future sustainability of these businesses.

ENGAGING THE MILLENNIAL HIPSTER

The Millennial Hipster Starter Pack (Source: The Guardian)

In an age where everyone who wants a voice can have one, Millennial's are a key target for brands that play within the restaurant group and fast/casual food franchise bubble. Born between the 1980's and early 2000’s, this cashed-up market not only have purchasing power, but also a core essence of entitlement (i.e. "me deserve this - me want now!"), due to being more educated and socially aware than any generation before them.

Accordingly, from a restaurant's perspective, they have the immediate and innate ability to empower and influence the direction of what their brand does….

Peer a bit deeper and it comes as no surprise that hipsters were the first and most visible sub-culture to peak out from this generation. Outlaw Consulting, a leading expert on understanding trendsetting youth for companies like Diageo and Nike, sums up these "progressive – creative – witty – stereotyped – bearded 'individuals'" perfectly by featuring this quote on their web site’s home page:

"Everyone wants to be a hipster, which makes being a hipster tricky and nearly obsolete."

Taking this into consideration, the "a-hah!" moment for McDonalds was recognising that the millennial hipster valued "authenticity" in every aspect of their lifestyle – including when deciding where they were to eat. They realised they are hungry to purchase "undiscovered" brands that related to their own values rather mainstream and established brands. Over and above that, they craved "experiences" when dining, rather than the tangible aspects of their meal. By increasing the size and scope of the McDonalds brand and force-feeding the ever-famous Golden Arches into the faces of this market, would purely be a plan of action to ensure the brand self-destructs. After all, the Hipster Mantra involves taking a lot of effort to make it look like you have taken no effort all.

So that's precisely what McDonalds did.

‘The Corner’ by McDonalds Australia (Source: The Guardian)

Looking beyond green-juice-in-mason-jars, five-grain rye breads and brown rice and lentils, McDonalds has opened "The Corner", your classic, cliché hipster led café within Sydney’s inner west suburb and growing hub of gentrification, Camperdown. From face value, it is unassuming from the outside with its branding carrying through solid tones of yellow, black and industrial touches of exposed metals.

Other than a small McCafe logo printed on packaging - the hipster tones include tiled walls, a herb garden, wooden sandwich boards, copious amounts of barista-made coffee, and of course free, WIFI.

Cheeseburgers and fries have been replaced with a number of fresh salads featuring Moroccan roast chicken breast and chipotle pulled pork, brown rice and pumpkin.

Menu items being tested at ‘The Corner’ (Source: Broadsheet)

Despite being positioned as a trial test kitchen for new products within the McDonald's family, it definitely draws question as to whether the future of the multinational brand will be shifting in line with the changes of the broader market's appetite.

With customers now dining to experience and discover restaurants that have a genuine and consistent identity and distinct brand voice; it suggests an essence of success in McDonald's unique-approach in targeting the millennial hipster market.

Although I can't imagine Ronald McDonald swapping his yellow onesie for some skinny jeans and leather jacket just yet, this form customer-centric branding has given Mr Kroc's original statement a new life within this market…  

"We provide food that customers love, day after day after day. People just want more of it."

Truly a reinvention of one of the world’s most iconic brands, however, I guess time will tell with how on point this new venture is and where the future of the McHappy meal heads.

Natasha Menon
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

When Rihanna Met Puma – The New Age of Celebrity Collaborations

(Source: BBC UK)

In what is now old news, Rihanna has signed on as Creative Director for the womenswear line at Puma. I’ve been meaning to talk about this for a while now, and not just for an excuse to feature the polarising singer herself, but to look at the implications of giving creative control of a brand to a celebrity. In what seems to be an on-going trend these days, celebrity endorsements have given way to celebrity collaborations, and with this Puma deal, celebrities are now taking on leadership roles within organisations.

Perhaps where we should start is to look at the difference between being an ambassador of a brand (wearing the clothes), and taking on a role as creative director (designing the clothes). The problem with the distinction between these two roles is that one has a greater degree of corporate accountability than the other – you can no doubt change who represents the brand overnight, but removing the association of a creative director is much more difficult as they are essentially an employee. Furthermore, the role of a creative director (in a branding context) is to lead the brand’s vision, whereas an ambassador is solely a reflection of this vision.

Now having dealt with some of the technicalities regarding these positions, I personally feel that Puma has made a really smart decision to sign on Rihanna as a Creative Director. The chart-topping singer has proven her design skills in previous collaborations with brands such as River Island and MAC Cosmetics, as well as her ability to sell whatever she puts her name to (the Riri Woo lipstick for MAC Cosmetics sold out within three hours of going on sale). She also has a stamp of approval from fashion figurehead Anna Wintour, who last year acknowledged her contribution to the industry, and awarded her the CFDA (Council of Fashion Designers of America) Style Icon Award.

So although there may have been speculation at the time that Puma could have instead hired a trained designer to fill this role, what they get with Rihanna is a minted tastemaker, and one with a phenomenal fan following (90 million likes on Facebook, 40 million Twitter followers, and 14.6 million followers on Instagram) and credibility within the fashion circle. It’s probably too early to say whether Puma have a potential hit on their hands, but considering Rihanna’s background, making hits is no new feat, and so I’m looking forward to seeing her impact on this brand in the months to come.

To read more about Rihanna’s new role, visit Puma’s press page.

Salil Kumar
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

SuperBowl Ads and Going Back to the Future

As SuperBowl XLIX is fast approaching, the world’s most expensive and creative ads start coming to light as well. As outsiders to advertising, you’d just think they keep getting more and more creative every year, and if not creative, at least more and more crazy and attention grabbing. But a little blast from the past by BMW can really help everyone enjoy a time when we didn’t exactly understand all of our newest technologies in order to help explain their new automotive concept. And of course, there’s no better time of year to put a brand new idea out there than during the SuperBowl, when the most viewers from around the world tune in to watch American Football players create a piece of history of their own.

The video below is a quick look at how confused we really were by a new technology. How no one understood it, yet, today, we couldn’t live without it. This technique is known as creating familiarity. It's one step in a long line of things put in place to help create and display value in products for consumers. It is masterfully brilliant, comparing unfamiliarity with the internet in 1994 to unfamiliarity to renewable energy in cars in 2015.

By reminding everyone how it felt to be confused by something new, BMW created the gateway into encouraging consumers to try and understand their newest all-electric car. Some users are opposed to change, yet change still happens over time and is something we adapt to without realising which direction or stance we even came from in the first place. That’s exactly what BMW is portraying here. It may seem confusing now, but in 21 years, it will be something we can’t live without…and hey, it will be much better and safer for our environment, cities and health.

Another interesting concept that the ad more subtly displays is the amount of change both Katie Couric and Bryant Gymbel have gone through. Their vocabulary didn’t even include the word for the “@“ sign in 1994, and by the end of the future portion of the ad, Bryant asks Katie if she can twerk. Additionally, Katie went from asking her assistant Alison, off-stage, to look something up for her, to calling her on her cell phone from the car. These transformations really help viewers from any part of the USA and other parts of the world come together on and relate to our modernisations.

Well done BMW; SupwerBowl viewers will really enjoy the ad, because it won’t be like all the overplayed and repetitive ones. People will never get tired of being reminded of humanities’ accomplishments.

Christine Drpich
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

A New Era at Gucci – New CEO & Creative Director Lead Re-brand

In the fashion world change is always imminent, and on most occasions required, in order to set new trends, push editorial boundaries and keep a brand relevant. But what I’ve always found most interesting about the industry is how re-branding works in particular, in the sense that when a new designer takes over the role as Creative Director for a brand, they have an opportunity to tell new stories, to alter the vision of the brand and re-invent the pieces that the brand is well known for.

Frida Giannini and Patrizio di Marco (Source: Fastcodesign)

So in hearing that Gucci’s CEO, Patrizio di Marco, and Creative Director, Frida Giannini, were leaving the company, I couldn’t help but feel apprehensive about the future of the brand. A few years back a similar situation took place at Yves Saint Laurent (which has now been rebranded as Saint Laurent Paris), where new Creative Director Hedi Slimane took the opportunity to completely overhaul the stagnant fashion house. At the time, the changes were met with trepidation, but as a few seasons have gone by, many in the industry (myself included) have come to accept and understand the evolution of the brand into a more relevant and perhaps more contemporary offering. It still embodies the elements of luxury that Yves Saint Laurent became known for, but the tone and styling is much more attuned to the millennial customer than before. This is a move that clearly paid off, as within 18 months of the re-brand, the Huffington Post reported a 40% increase in the brand’s overall retail sales, and that many items had sold out within days of the new collections hitting stores.

So although we’ll have to wait and see whether a successful re-branding can be achieved at Gucci, it seems that things are off to a good start. Despite both figureheads departing the company much earlier than expected (most in the industry were under the impression that last week’s Mens collection and the impending Womenswear collection were to be Giannini’s last), Gucci was quick to announce Giannini’s successor, Alessandro Michele (former Head of Accessories), who reportedly reworked the entire mens collection within a span of just 5 days. The re-worked show was clearly a strategic effort on Michele’s part, as the company’s new CEO mentioned in an interview that ‘[Michele] and I are fully aligned on this new contemporary vision needed by the brand and we will be continuously inspired by that new identity in our respective roles and duties.’

Gucci’s New Creative Director, Alessandro Michele (Source: Wall Street Journal)

As I’ve spoken about in the past, the evolution of brands in the luxury sector often involves re-invention, from the clothes down to the brand story. By shifting the creative focus of a fashion brand, you have an opportunity to take a completely new direction, and like with Yves Saint Laurent, address a new customer set and point of view. Although there is always a risk of alienating existing customers and followers of the brand, most people in the industry understand the need for change, and like myself, anticipate it when a brand loses the level of awareness it once had.

I for one will be keeping a close eye on Gucci throughout 2015, and look forward to seeing the changes that the iconic brand will make to realise its new vision.

Salil Kumar
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

Flashback to Personal Branding

As an up-and-coming marketer, I find this blog a very good place to reflect upon personal experiences - especially those which come from realising I am seeing things in a new way, thanks to my education and new skills from the Master of Marketing program. One such experience has come from Sydney’s real estate market and my search for the perfect new home.

That being said, I’ve come to modify my personal brand in a new way - a way in which it is purely seeming to be dependant upon the property’s personality, or the agent listed with the property. My personal brand has become a shape shifter, and I don’t think it should be. So, I think it’s time I looked back into the fundamentals of our personal brand as marketers.

First, we should be consistent. When working with a real estate agent, you would probably assume you have to frame yourself in a certain way to leave the best and most lasting impression. That may be the case - you could even leave your business card so they remember you when you’re calling back or having a second viewing. After all, you want to make the cut in preliminary applications and have a reference from the agent to the owners. With the property listed and seen below, there are probably hundreds of people in the Sydney area looking at this individual townhouse. And if you are professional, and come prepared with a completely filled application, you’ve probably made their life easier. But, do you fit the desired profile yet?

Second, your personal brand may be adaptable, but you may also need to get business done and move on to other things. Companies like Meriton are prepared for any and all profiles of tenants. Chances are your personal brand will even stay more in tact working with these agents because they just want the cold hard facts; can you afford it or not? This isn’t an instance where you have to market yourself, and it’s actually better because you’re not trying to be something or someone you’re not, simply to find a roof to put over your head.

Ultimately, the property search was strenuous. I thought behaving the way I usually do, being honest about my job, my academic history, and even my nationality, are more important than faking it until I make it. Some owners may think certain profiles aren’t trustworthy enough, but then how would students begin to market themselves and start building a rent history, if no one will give them a house? I guess, it’s all going to have to be trial and error, as long as your personal brand doesn't get taken down in the process.

Christine Drpich
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

A Coup for Diversity – Tiffany & Co. Feature Same Sex Couple in New Ad

(Source: Time.com)

For an ad that has recently been on high rotation on the interwebs, it seems that Tiffany & Co. have hit the right mark by featuring a real same sex couple as part of their recent ad campaign for Tiffany engagement rings. Although it’s a little unfortunate that in this day and age we’re surprised when brands engage (pun fully intended) with the LGBT community (or any other minority), it’s still a moment worth celebrating - especially when it’s a first for the brand itself, as well as the overall fine jewellery industry.

Without segueing into a social equity discussion, I just wanted to visit a few points from a brand strategy angle that this ad brings to the table. The most obvious point to make here is that Tiffany & Co. are finally addressing an existing market niche. With marriage equality spreading through most nations, same sex couples, like everyone else, need engagement rings and are likely to purchase them from the iconic brand. By representing this market in a more visible manner, Tiffany & Co. are sending an overarching message of acceptance and inclusion – that their products are suitable for people from all walks of life, regardless of gender, race or sexuality. As mentioned by a Tiffany & Co. spokesperson, ‘Nowadays, the road to marriage is no longer linear, and true love can happen more than once with love stories coming in a variety of forms’. This is a powerful brand message, and one that is only made believable through an equally powerful visual campaign.

The second point worth mentioning is that from an internal marketing perspective, Tiffany & Co. are also addressing any pro LGBT employment policies that they may have in place. It’s one thing to say you don’t discriminate against the LGBT community, but to then represent them on this scale creates a cohesive brand message – one that employees are expected to internalise, and reflect in the way they treat each other and Tiffany & Co.’s customers. Although it goes without saying that same sex couples should receive the same level of service as other customers, the ad campaign works to further normalise the event of a same sex couple visiting Tiffany & Co. for engagement rings, or shopping together for any other jewellery item.

On a final note, I can’t not mention that a campaign such as this one was bound to create a bit of controversy and bring with it free press for the brand. Although I applaud the fact that Tiffany & Co. came up with this concept and executed it so perfectly, I do also hope that it wasn’t a flash in the pan, and is followed up by a consistent array of brand messaging and imagery that continues to engage with the LGBT community, and other minorities not adequately represented by brands in this industry.

To see the full campaign image, visit Tiffany & Co. 

Salil Kumar
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

The Kingsman Collection – A Fashion & Film First

Official film merchandising is no new concept, and especially for films with pre-existing fan communities (think Twilight and Harry Potter), or the potential to create new ones (Frozen anyone?). However, the scale of these merchandising agreements is usually quite large, and results in items that are often affordable for the average filmgoer. For this reason alone, upon hearing that Mr Porter (brother of online retailer, Net-A-Porter) was co-producing a luxury menswear line with the costume designer from upcoming release, Kingsman: The Secret Service, I was genuinely surprised that such a collaboration was to take place.

For a little backstory on Mr Porter, the online retailer has been curating and selling high-end menswear items since 2011, and now stocks more than 200 of the world’s leading brands. In addition to this, it has a total of 1.6 million monthly unique visitors, and offers worldwide express shipping to 170 countries. Having ordered from this site on numerous occasions, I can personally vouch for the fact that it is without doubt the most premium online shopping experience a man can get, right down to the personalised ‘Mr Kumar’ printed stationary that arrived with my order.

So although I never doubted the Mr Porter side of this new collaboration, I was more intrigued as to the potential market for a luxury menswear line inspired by an essentially pop culture film. Admittedly, the attempt at such a collaboration has the danger of being ‘gimmicky’ (no matter what the price tag of the items), but where the strategy really seems to hold is that both parties have involved existing Saville Row designers to create custom pieces for the ‘Kingsman’ line. In doing so, not only does it add designer credibility to the collection, but it also becomes associated with brands that the existing Saville Row customer (who is most likely the target market of the collection) is already comfortable with.

Whether this collection has the potential to organically grow into a full-flegded menswear brand is still up in the air, but its an idea that is certainly a first for the luxury fashion industry, and thus may result in a new niche in this market. It’ll also be interesting to see how the Kingsman brand and movie individually perform, and whether the success of the movie translate into more sales and brand awareness for the menswear collection.

To read more about this collaboration visit Mr Porter’s website.

Salil Kumar
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

Blogger Engagement 101 – A Morning with Mulberry

With the rise of social media, there’s been an emergence of a new category of celebrity, also known as ‘bloggers’, or better yet, ‘digital influencers’. Part of what has made blogging such a success story is that there is a sense of authenticity that surrounds reading content written by someone who is genuinely passionate about the topic of conversation (whether it’s fashion, beauty, food or any other subject), and has a unique point of view to share. A space that was originally filled by magazines and traditional print media, blogging has provided a platform for individuals seeking to share personal experiences in a much less formal manner; not unlike how you would share a story with a close friend.

With fan followings that often surpass ‘offline’ celebrities, it was inevitable that brands would want to collaborate with bloggers, and co-create branded content. Although there isn’t a formula for curating the perfect blogger collaboration, there are a few things brands need to be aware of, and keep in mind when deciding to engage with bloggers.

The most commonly made mistake by brands is in selecting the wrong blogger to collaborate with. Although it may be tempting to work with someone with a large fan-following of their own, if the ethos of the blogger’s brand doesn’t match that of your own business, then it often results in content that reads as very contrived. Without naming names, this often occurs when brands pay bloggers to review products from a completely different industry (say paying a beauty blogger to review a set of high-tech headphones). In some contexts this may work, but in general it has the risk of tainting the authenticity of the blogger whom you’re working with, and leaving a questionable impression of your brand in the mind of the reader (i.e. making it very clear that you paid for this review).

I could go on and on about all the different ways that brands have unsuccessfully worked with bloggers in the past, but I really wanted to provide an example of a great blogger collaboration that was put together by the luxury British, brand Mulberry. The collaboration featured YouTube power couple Tanya Burr (a make-up artist and beauty blogger), and Jim Chapman (a men’s lifestyle blogger), who collectively have around 11 million followers across all their social media platforms. The collaboration consisted of a video, and photo-shoot following the couple’s daily life in London, and featured a set of Mulberry bags that they were photographed with.

The reason this collaboration works so well is that it features the bloggers in a very natural setting (their own home and neighbourhood) and integrates the brand seamlessly into their lives. As shown in the image below, you can clearly see both bloggers with Mulberry bags, but that isn't the entire focus of the shoot. Instead it portrays a momentary glimpse into how they use their Mulberry items on a day-to-day basis.

Jim Chapman & Tanya Burr in Mulberry (Source: Mulberry Website)

Other brands that have also curated great blogger collaborations include Burberry with their ‘Art of the Trench’ initiative, ASOS with their ‘Bloggers We Love’ section, as well as Nike, with the blogger collaborations surrounding the launch of their Nike ID service.

There is without a doubt great opportunities for all parties involved in collaborations such as the ones mentioned above, but once again it comes down to the strategy of selecting the right bloggers, featuring the brand in an authentic manner, and creating content that is genuinely engaging for your own target market, and that of the bloggers you are working with.

To read more information about the Mulberry collaboration in particular, visit Mulberry.com.

Salil Kumar
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

Fitness Centres Marketing for New Years Resolutions

Are you ready for your New Years resolution? I’m 99% sure it will probably have something to do with wanting to lose weight, or gain muscle/tone. That’s because that’s what we all say every new year - and it’s not such a terrible thing! Especially when our local fitness centres set us up with such good deals; how could you resist? In this case, it’s kind of like “which came first, the chicken or the egg?” in that you have to wonder, “which came first, the desire to lose weight, or the inspiration based on the advertisement.” Believe it or not, these type of marketing schemes came up in discussion in our Research and Decision Making course - along with similar topics of risk and reward.

Above is the current offer at Fitness First Australia. Of course they want you to get in the door at the beginning of the year. It will be so crowded - at least for the first two months before everyone gives up. But there’s a hidden topic of discussion here: how does the type of membership, incentive, or contract, affect our behaviour when it comes to fitness or going to the gym?

For most of us, we’ll probably get too busy finishing up work we take home with us, or chores around the house, or catching up with friends. That’s why those type of people would probably go for the month to month contract; this way, they won’t experience a sunk cost or any cognitive dissonance if they can’t make it all the time. Alternatively, these same people may even spend more to get the full year contract so that they have to consistently go to the gym to get their money’s worth. This indecision is exactly where the gym’s marketing efforts pay off.

So which plan is really better for you if you do decide to take the new years resolution plan? Well, Anytime Fitness Australia, as displayed above, compares their membership fees to other common daily expenditures on their website landing page. Here they added the extra effect of guilt tripping you into their reoccurring small fee membership type. Yes, it’s inexpensive. Yes, you should probably be going to the gym instead of buying coffee. And yes, you can afford it every month to keep going back because you’ll be so much happier if you do and you wouldn’t be wasting your money since it’s on your health. All of these thought statements pertain specifically back to experiencing sunk cost if you don’t go. Either way you’ll experience it. Either on your promise to yourself if you don’t get healthy because you didn’t have any obligation to keep going back, or on your money spent because you don’t use it as often as you intended to.

So before you make the decision, just know that marketers have already built pathways for your money around whichever type of behaviour you end up exhibiting. Once they’ve got you, they’ve got you for good. So even if you’re on a monthly pass, they will find some way to tell you exactly how well you’d do on your new year resolution if you get a friend to sign up too! How about some money off next month’s fees?

Christine Drpich
Current student in the Master of Marketing program at the University of Sydney Business School

Marketing Themes in Ethics and Regulation

An article from Advertising Age, written by Kate Kaye, brings to light extremely relevant insights on advertising and digital regulation, with support from the Pew Research Center Internet Project study.



With the rise of the digital revolution comes growing concerns about privacy amongst consumers. According to the research mentioned in Kaye’s article: “91% of participants ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ that consumers have lost control over how their personal data is collected and used by corporations”.

I would further add that the burgeoning number of loosely regulated surveys and other forms of poorly administered data gathering — often in the name of marketing — raises an urgent need for regulatory frameworks that ensure quality, trust and security for internet goers and other online consumers.

This study, while reporting on a U.S. research project, would produce similar results if replicated in Australia. Our Masters students, within the University of Sydney Business School, should know of the work that the Association of Market and Social Research Organisations (www.amsro.com.au) does. Additionally, its Privacy Code is co-regulated by the Australian Privacy Commissioner.



I see consumer data privacy as one of the enduring issues facing marketing in this decade and beyond. The University of Sydney Master of Marketing program is one of the few in this country that has a specialised unit of study addressing this issue called ‘Regulatory Environment and Ethics.’ In addition, the Masters program is one of only two that are accredited by the Australian Marketing Institute (www.ami.org.au), which is also a strong advocate of best practice, particularly on this matter. The Discipline of Marketing holds Corporate Membership in the institute and, last month, was a sponsor of the AMI National Awards for Marketing Excellence.

Terry Beed
Hon Associate Professor of Marketing at the University of Sydney Business School